In Re KRISS MICHELE PERRAS v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380-81 2004 . Ms. Perras has not demonstrated…

N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
In Re KRISS MICHELE PERRAS,
Petitioner
______________________
2024-124
______________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in No. 24-1892.
______________________
ON PETITION
______________________
Before L OURIE, D YK, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
Kriss Michele Perras seeks a “Writ of Supersedeas Im-
mediate stay of August 18, 2022 DB order,” ECF No. 2 at
1, which we understand as seeking mandamus relief.
On March 23, 2024, Ms. Perras filed an appeal at the
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ap-
pearing to seek review of, among other things, an August
2022 Order of Behavioral Restriction issued to Ms. Perras
by the Chief of Staff of the VA Southern Nevada Healthcare
System. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs has moved to
dismiss that appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction,
which remains pending.
Case: 24-124 Document: 14 Page: 1 Filed: 05/28/2024

-- 1 of 2 --

IN RE PERRAS 2
Federal courts “may issue all writs necessary or appro-
priate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable
to the usages and principles of law.” 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a).
“In general, three conditions must be satisfied for a writ to
issue: (1) the petitioner must demonstrate a clear and in-
disputable right to issuance of the writ; (2) the petitioner
must have no other adequate method of attaining the de-
sired relief; and (3) the court must be satisfied that the writ
is appropriate under the circumstances.” In re Apple Inc.,
979 F.3d 1332, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2020) (citing Cheney v. U.S.
Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380–81 (2004)).
Ms. Perras has not demonstrated entitlement to man-
damus relief. She currently has an appeal pending before
the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims challenging the
same order. To the extent that the Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims, and by extension this court, have juris-
diction to review such orders, such proceedings provide an
adequate means by which Ms. Perras can obtain relief.
And to the extent that such jurisdiction is lacking, Ms. Per-
ras has no clear and indisputable right to relief here. Fi-
nally, if Ms. Perras seeks to have this court issue a writ
directing the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims to issue
such a final decision, we cannot say that she has shown
egregious delay or that issuance of a writ is appropriate.
Accordingly,
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
The petition and all pending motions are denied.
May 28, 2024
Date
F OR THE COURT
Case: 24-124 Document: 14 Page: 2 Filed: 05/28/2024

-- 2 of 2 --